Related Stories

By pulling out from the Obama-backed deal, Trump would send a strong message that the economy is more important to his administration than questionable climate change deals.

The agreement supposedly allows multiple countries to combat the vague threat of man-made global warming, but it would likely be quite expensive for developed countries such as the United States.

“The Paris Agreement’s central aim is to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by keeping a global temperature rise this century well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase even further to 1.5 degrees Celsius,” explained the United Nations.

Advertisement - story continues below

“To reach these ambitious goals, appropriate financial flows, a new technology framework and an enhanced capacity building framework will be put in place, thus supporting action by developing countries and the most vulnerable countries, in line with their own national objectives,” the U.N. continued.

Those three key words — “appropriate financial flows” — essentially mean that the U.S. would be forced to pay for success, and would be obligated to send a significant stream of money to other countries.

Unsurprisingly, observers on the left had harsh words about the likely withdrawal. “(Other countries) would see withdrawal as a slap in the face, disrespecting their fundamental interests and, in turn, eroding the United States’ diplomatic capital,” former Obama adviser Todd Stern wrote in The Washington Post.

Despite frequent claims that the science of climate change is settled, many respected scientists continue to question the actual levels of climate change and their true causes and effects.